Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Digital Image Processing => Topic started by: adias on August 30, 2007, 09:34:46 pm
-
I downloaded the Mac version of CO 4.0 beta for the MAC. It is slow as molasses. Are others observing this? I've tried it on an intel Mac Pro w/ gobbles of RAM.
-
I downloaded the Mac version of CO 4.0 beta for the MAC. It is slow as molasses. Are others observing this? I've tried it on an intel Mac Pro w/ gobbles of RAM.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=136467\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Same experience, slow on both G5 and Intel powered Macs. Also encountered a few crashes on a dual G5.
-
I briefly used an earlier beta with Phase One a few months ago and found it to be far, far faster than v3 on the same machine. They still have work to do but my hopes are high from that experience. C1 users should be pleased when it is completed and solid.
-
I downloaded the Mac version of CO 4.0 beta for the MAC. It is slow as molasses. Are others observing this? I've tried it on an intel Mac Pro w/ gobbles of RAM.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=136467\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I downloaded the beta last night and fired it up without problem. Running XP with 2GB of memory, 4b ran fine on 5D-size images. Although I have no firm conclusions, I was very pleased with the potential of the highlight and shadow controls. The highlight control was able to tame images that previously seemed impossible to deal with. Finally, my impression is that the color right out-of-the-box is much more pleasant than I obtain with lightroom. This observation about the color quality is perplexing to me. It would seem that lightroom 1.1 has much more sophisticated controls for managing saturation, hue and lightness, and yet in my first experiments 4b provides a more appealing palette with virtually no fussing.
I look forward to hearing other views on the subject.
-
This may seem a bit basic, but I couldn't figure out how to convert raw images to TIFF files, or if I did, I don't know where C1 put them. Not impressed.
Edit: Finally found them in My Pictures, apparently no way to set where they go. Not impressed.
--John
-
It would seem that lightroom 1.1 has much more sophisticated controls for managing saturation, hue and lightness, and yet in my first experiments 4b provides a more appealing palette with virtually no fussing. [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=136558\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I think that's a really good observation. C1 is quite good out of the box and basic adjustments can be made extremely easily but the fine tuning controls aren't there. C1's tethered shooting, soft proofing and ability to export CMYK files makes it a more complete solution for a number of commercial and/or studio shooters today. I particularly like how C1 handles highlight transitions to white. Adobe's highlight transitions (even with ACR4.1) are a weak spot, IMO.
This may seem a bit basic, but I couldn't figure out how to convert raw images to TIFF files, or if I did, I don't know where C1 put them. Not impressed.
Edit: Finally found them in My Pictures, apparently no way to set where they go. Not impressed.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=136599\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hey John! I agree this is unintuitive. C1 requires that you setup capture and process folders under the Organize tab. In the 4.0 beta they now call the process folder the Output folder which you can set by double clicking on it. You can also set the output folder in the Process tab (that looks like a gear). If you look under the process tab it has all sorts of processing (or export) options like the ability to save CMYK TIFFs. The public beta doesn't appear to let you select CMYK profiles yet. And like Adobe's Image Processor, C1's BatchTool can simultaneously make low res sRGB JPEGs and full res CMYK TIFFs for example. C1v4 should be a blast.
-
Hey John! I agree this is unintuitive. C1 requires that you setup capture and process folders under the Organize tab. In the 4.0 beta they now call the process folder the Output folder which you can set by double clicking on it.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=136603\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thanks, I see it now. I find it rather bizarre that these options can only be accessed with the icons, apparently not through the menu. Once I see it, easy to set though. The real issue is quality of output--will have to study that for a bit.
--John
-
I grab a quick shot and processed in both versions to see any significant difference. Here are the resulting JPGs:
(http://rodex.com/images/c1/C1-pro-v377.jpg)
(http://rodex.com/images/c1/C1-pro-v4-beta.jpg)
-
4.0 beta didn't work on my 2 year old machine (windows xp64, 12Gb ram, quad core)
just would never launch. instant crash report to Phase. I gave up and removed it.
However...
I have to say Michael is coming across as a bit biased towards Lightroom. We all know he has invested a lot of time in it, with the tutorials etc, but it seems Lightroom is great for high production work flows, where good enough colour does, but C1 gives you the utmost in files and colour (to me) for a slightly slower workflow.
Yes Lightroom has more controls, but if its basic profiles for your camera/back aren't really excellent (and Phase's are very good indeed) then its a lot of work to get close to a comparable C1 file.
I'm in the business of needing near perfect files - not a high workflow situation - just the absolute best file I can possibly get out of my P45+ images, and have no interest in compromising that for a quicker workflow or bells and whistles Raw Converter. For this reason, I'm perfectly happy with C1 (even 3.7x) rather than Lightroom.
Horses for Courses, I guess.
-
but it seems Lightroom is great for high production work flows, where good enough colour does, but C1 gives you the utmost in files and colour (to me) for a slightly slower workflow.
For those that need to convert to CMYK files, C1 is far faster. And the ability to lock in your settings during a tethered shoot is fantastic. For some photographers Lightroom isn't yet a option worth considering but the possibly of equivalent features in LR2 could very compelling.
Today there are different tools aimed at different folks and no clear winners.
-
I have to say Michael is coming across as a bit biased towards Lightroom. We all know he has invested a lot of time in it, with the tutorials etc,
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=136615\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Horse-crap...that may be your impression, but it's WAY far south of the truth. Michael really WANTD to like it...he also has close ties to Phase One and was rooting for them. He's a friend of Kevin Raber from Phase One (whose gone on the last two and will be along for the next Antarctic trip). Michael's been to the factory in Denmark and has tried to offer feedback to them regarding Capture One's shortcomings. If anything, Michael is bending over backwards in an attempt NOT to be biased. Presuming bias on your part is your own baggage, not Michael's.
I actually was surprised that the beta of 4 offered so little. And the switch to dark gray/black UI is well, let's just say a bit derivative?
-
I downloaded the C1-4 beta. I installed it (took forever because it required running and installing .NET), ran it for fifteen minutes, and uninstalled it. Not a promising start. It seemed slow on my system (Win XP Pro, dual-core Opteron, 4GB RAM) when starting and loading a folder. At on point in working on a 1Ds2 image, the preview just froze and remained pixelated. But the worst thing: it supposedly supports Canon Mark III files. It rendered the thumbnails, but that's where it stopped. I tried opening several files. Each time I got the "Loading..." message, but no image.
I always liked the quality of files from Capture One, though it seems antiquated by Lightroom standards in the adjustments department. I do feel it produces better files, in many ways, than Lightroom, such as smmother tone, sharper without artifacts. Unlike Lightroom, I love that you don't have to import files, you just open them where they are. I'll be curious about the Pro version. I'm unimpressed by the current beta, but will keep my mind open
-
I downloaded the C1-4 beta. I installed it (took forever because it required running and installing .NET), ran it for fifteen minutes, and uninstalled it.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=136647\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I did the same. My gripe: Phase One needs to pay more attention to UI. It’s a shame because I think we all benefit when two equally competent teams compete. At the moment Lightroom is light years ahead with a bright future... imho. But don’t underestimate Canon’s DPP if you are a Canon user.
I have to say Michael is coming across as a bit biased towards Lightroom.
As Jeff said above, Michael’s review was only charitably polite to Phase One given his previous relationship with C1, the company and staff. (Michael has spent more on Phase One backs then I’ve spent on my house.) No bias in that review on the side of Lightroom that I could see. You need to know some history to read between the lines.
-
I actually was surprised that the beta of 4 offered so little. And the switch to dark gray/black UI is well, let's just say a bit derivative?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=136639\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
If we are talking derivative we must give credit to ED Darkroom from which many other applications have borrowed heavily from lately.
-
I just tried the Windows version and that is usable. The OS X version is just too slow.
I agree with MR nothing to write home about.
-
Horse-crap...that may be your impression, but it's WAY far south of the truth. Michael really WANTD to like it...he also has close ties to Phase One and was rooting for them. He's a friend of Kevin Raber from Phase One (whose gone on the last two and will be along for the next Antarctic trip). Michael's been to the factory in Denmark and has tried to offer feedback to them regarding Capture One's shortcomings. If anything, Michael is bending over backwards in an attempt NOT to be biased. Presuming bias on your part is your own baggage, not Michael's.
I actually was surprised that the beta of 4 offered so little. And the switch to dark gray/black UI is well, let's just say a bit derivative?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=136639\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
oh, Mr Schewe, aren't you are in those Lightroom videos too, and have somethings invested in that, no?
Yes, I'm well aware of Michaels investment and affinity for Phase One products. I hope he would want to like 4.0, and yes, I too am disappointed with the ridiculous amount of time it took to arrive, and still seems nowhere near finished. I have heavily invested in Phase too (on my third back) However, the core of my point remains that I get better files from C1 than I do from Lightroom, (both for Phase and Canon with Magnes profiles) so.. it doesn't matter how many controls or features they put in Lightroom, or how snappy the interface, if it doesn't deliver a better ultimate image, I'm not going to use it for my work (yes, I do have it, and no I'm not against Adobe - I own stock in them for chrissake...)
I guess my point is, don't overlook maximum quality as a driving force behind some people's choice of raw engine, over and above anything else. It sometimes seems that gets forgotten in all the books, videos, tutorials, and general Lightroom hoopla. its just my 2c worth, feel free to ignore.
-
oh, Mr Schewe, aren't you are in those Lightroom videos too, and have somethings invested in that, no?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=136688\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yeah, and what's you're point? You think that makes my opinion about Michael's review of Capture One biased? Get a friggin' life bud.
Maybe it's ok for you to throw out ill reasoned assumptions that impugn somebody else's reputation in your neck of the woods, but in my area, you better have something more than a "feeling" before you allege "bias". That's a pretty serious charge...and it's both unfounded (based upon YOUR uninformed opinion) and untrue.
If you presume that people in Michael's position can't be unbiased because of what all he does, that says a lot about you (and very little about Michael).
And yet, you even admit to owning Adobe stock, so clearly, anything YOU say is biased, right?
The English language is precious, make sure you don't screw the pooch when you use it.
-
After reading about the high output quality for the 5D I downloaded the beta and I have some observations.
It's use is awkward
It's output is the best I've seen, far better than Adobe's output and better than DxO's
Marc
-
Right with you there about image quality . I was hoping CS3 was goimg to deliver better files this time around as the UI is so good and processing faster but found myself back with C1 as the colour quality seems so much better and effortless to achieve, there is no smearing of detail and highlights don't seem clipped as easily as ACR and DPP. I have even made the sharpening work for me at last after moaning about it a few times in these forums.
The Beta of C1 is interesting and the shadow highlight tool a big plus. Its slow on my mac G5 - but I have yet to try it on my Macbook pro. I'm really looking foward to the final product
oh, Mr Schewe, aren't you are in those Lightroom videos too, and have somethings invested in that, no?
Yes, I'm well aware of Michaels investment and affinity for Phase One products. I hope he would want to like 4.0, and yes, I too am disappointed with the ridiculous amount of time it took to arrive, and still seems nowhere near finished. I have heavily invested in Phase too (on my third back) However, the core of my point remains that I get better files from C1 than I do from Lightroom, (both for Phase and Canon with Magnes profiles) so.. it doesn't matter how many controls or features they put in Lightroom, or how snappy the interface, if it doesn't deliver a better ultimate image, I'm not going to use it for my work (yes, I do have it, and no I'm not against Adobe - I own stock in them for chrissake...)
I guess my point is, don't overlook maximum quality as a driving force behind some people's choice of raw engine, over and above anything else. It sometimes seems that gets forgotten in all the books, videos, tutorials, and general Lightroom hoopla. its just my 2c worth, feel free to ignore.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=136688\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Yeah, and what's you're point? You think that makes my opinion about Michael's review of Capture One biased? Get a friggin' life bud.ou don't screw the pooch when you use it.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=136689\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Jeff:
No need to be so bully and blunt all the time. No need to treat others like dirt. It seems to be a characteristic of yours in this forum and the Adobe forum. You seem angry all the time. Come on, we actually like your work and respect your knowledge.
-
No need to be so bully and blunt all the time. [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=136781\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Not true...when somebody (that I don't know from Adam) alleges bias on the part of somebody like Michael simply because he has done a Lightroom tutorial, (and I know for an absolute fact it's a load of crap), I jump...
It's all too easy to type letters that make words that combine to create ill considered or ignorant statements. I would suggest that if people wish to engage in civil debate, that they be careful what they write.
-
Meanwhile back to the topic at hand, is Capture One 4 a superior product in terms of the the results? Put aside for the moment the layout, workflow, features, speed, important as these are, and focus on the output.
In the photograph that Henry posted, which compared the old and the new version, the old version shows somewhat darker colours than the new. Has anyone compared the results in terms of detail, fidelity and the like with other RAW processors such as Bibble, Lightroom. Nikon's NX, DxO or Silkypix?
-
4.0 beta didn't work on my 2 year old machine (windows xp64, 12Gb ram, quad core)
just would never launch. instant crash report to Phase. I gave up and removed it.
However...
I have to say Michael is coming across as a bit biased towards Lightroom. We all know he has invested a lot of time in it, with the tutorials etc, but it seems Lightroom is great for high production work flows, where good enough colour does, but C1 gives you the utmost in files and colour (to me) for a slightly slower workflow.
Yes Lightroom has more controls, but if its basic profiles for your camera/back aren't really excellent (and Phase's are very good indeed) then its a lot of work to get close to a comparable C1 file.
I'm in the business of needing near perfect files - not a high workflow situation - just the absolute best file I can possibly get out of my P45+ images, and have no interest in compromising that for a quicker workflow or bells and whistles Raw Converter. For this reason, I'm perfectly happy with C1 (even 3.7x) rather than Lightroom.
Horses for Courses, I guess.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=136615\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
I'm not biased toward either Lightroom or Capture One I can tell you. I'm on my third Phase One back (P45+) and liked Capture One when it first came out as really it was the best available. Like Michael, I think--that was then and this is now. After working with both C1 4 beta and Lightroom I'm leaning toward Lightroom not only for ease of use, but also for quality control. I simply have more control over my image file in Lightroom. That is not to say C1 won't improve---alter all this is a beta, tho too long in coming. but right now I tend to convert to DNG in C1 4.0 beta, and work in Lightroom (tho I'm still experimenting with comparing RAW file conversions in both applications).
Does anyone know (jeff??) when the next update to Lightroom will be out that will support Phase One P45+ RAW files so I won't have to convert to DNG first?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137074\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
well call me biased, but the only good thing i can find about this beta is the DNG export....the interface is a clear attempt to blend in with all the others, the highlight/shadow recovery falls into teh finally category.....and in the end: well i can't really use it because it does not shoot tethered....the FINAL version was supposed to come out in march...at least that is what i was told when i bought my P30....i used ot have leaf, so i take everyhting with a grain of salt but i still can't understand what can possibly take so long and now i have to wait another year?
we are talking workflow...i can't rely on something that MIGHT come out in a year..i have to look elsewhere......LR not only saves me a TON of time in postproduction (i can't even imagine going back to dealing with 3 different apps again...) and i actually prefer the conversions...sometimes the phase ones are better....sometimes not....of course this is personal....i prefer the grainstructure and color in LR to C1...shadows are the same to me, detail seems to brittle in C1....it comes down to the same old thing....with great lenses (and i am not talking about zoom vs fixed canons here....i am talking about schneider/rollei and RZ) my files do not need any sharpening and they always look sharpened in C1......anyway...this is personal.....
either way...when v4 pro comes out we will probably all be drooling over LR2.0 and C1 will be what it has turned into...a great fringe Dfile converter supporting rock solid tether.....sorry that is what it was 2 years ago and that is what i expect to come with every DSLR these days....it has not evolved in any way...2 new sliders don't mean anything.....so actually comparing LR to C1 is not fair anymore....it is not in the same league, LR is a totally different app which happens to convert my files better (imo) then C1.....tethered is LR's only shortcoming and i am afraid phase will hold on to dear life to all data and files to not give adobe access.....but in the end adobe will make it work.....
-
Guys
Its BETA, expect errors, report them - just like with the last Adobe products that have been send public BETA, they too needed work and this is no different.
We will all be better off, if C1 becomes a good product, Adobe and others will have to up their game and so on.
Re Michael, I would say that he give it fair attention, the product isn't currently up to scratch, and there was no need to beat someone lying down. I have a lot of confidence and respect in the reviews and reviewers here. They have to me been spot on, for many years, without missing the beat. So, if you have just dropped in, then take the time to look over things here first. Lightroom is a program that has matured very quickly with a lot of support both here and elsewhere. Its not my tool of choice but the debate about it helps educate me. YMMV
Back to the topic, I couldn't even get it to run on my windoze XP x64 machine but hey no big deal 3.7.7 still works fine and so does ACR4.1 so I can wait and if its a lemon, well I keep my options open
Henrik
A Dane Down Under - and NO, I don't support C1 because I am danish, but because it has been a great product for the last many years...but other are catching up and some has passed it